Relevant bibliographies by topics / Quick Screening Battery

Contents

  1. Journal articles
  2. Dissertations / Theses

Academic literature on the topic 'Quick Screening Battery'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 4 June 2021
Last updated: 7 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Quick Screening Battery.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Journal articles on the topic "Quick Screening Battery"

1

Nash, Michael M., and Richard L. Schwaller. "A Multiple-Choice, Group Screening Format for the Quick Test." Psychological Reports 57, no. 3_suppl (December 1985): 1297–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1985.57.3f.1297.

Full text
Abstract:
The Quick Test worked well when presented in a multiple-choice format to a small group to estimate IQs of 158 inmates. rs were .55 with the General Aptitude Test Battery Verbal scores and .58 with the General scores. Research forms developed by the publisher are more easily managed.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Carvajal, Howard, and Jon Gerber. "1986 Stanford-Binet Abbreviated Forms." Psychological Reports 61, no. 1 (August 1987): 285–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1987.61.1.285.

Full text
Abstract:
Scores extracted for the Quick Screening Battery (4 subtests) and the General Purpose Abbreviated Battery (6 subtests) from the 1986 Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale administered to 16 men and 16 women ( Mage: 18 yr., 11 mo.) gave means of 101.0 vs 100.6 (100.9 for the full test). SDs were 9 or 10. Mean times were 34 min. vs 52 min. (114 min. for full test); rs ranged from .907 to .942 for the overlapping scales.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Huang, Lin, Ke-Liang Chen, Bi-Ying Lin, Le Tang, Qian-Hua Zhao, Fang Li, and Qi-Hao Guo. "An abbreviated version of Silhouettes test: a brief validated mild cognitive impairment screening tool." International Psychogeriatrics 31, no. 06 (December 19, 2018): 849–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1041610218001230.

Full text
Abstract:
ABSTRACTObjectives:To revise an abbreviated version of the Silhouettes subtest of the Visual Object and Space Perception (VOSP) battery in order to recognize mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and determine the optimal cutoffs to differentiate among cognitively normal controls (NC), MCI, and Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) in the Chinese elderly.Design:A cross-sectional validation study.Setting:Huashan Hospital, Shanghai, China.Subjects:A total of 591 participants: Individuals with MCI (n = 211), AD (n = 139) and NC (n = 241) were recruited from the Memory Clinic, Huashan Hospital, Shanghai, China.Methods:Baseline neuropsychological battery (including VOSP) scores were collected from firsthand data. An abbreviated version of silhouettes test (Silhouettes-A) was revised from the original English version more suitable for the elderly, including eight silhouettes of animals and seven silhouettes of inanimate objects, with a score ranging from 0 to 15.Results:Silhouettes-A was an effective test to screen MCI in the Chinese elderly with good sensitivity and specificity, similar to the Montreal cognitive assessment and superior to other single tests reflecting language, spatial, or executive function. However, it had no advantage in distinguishing MCI from AD. The corresponding optimal cutoff scores of Silhouettes-A were 10 for screening MCI and 8 for AD.Conclusion:Silhouettes-A is a quick, simple, sensitive, and dependable cognitive test to distinguish among NC, MCI, and AD patients.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Eder, E., D. Schiffmann, K. Dornbusch, W. Kütt, and C. Hoffman. "Genotoxicity of allyl compounds—A quick screening strategy based on structure-activity relationships and a battery of prescreening tests." Food and Chemical Toxicology 24, no. 6-7 (June 1986): 667–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0278-6915(86)90155-9.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Nordlund, Arto, Lisbeth Påhlsson, Christina Holmberg, Karin Lind, and Anders Wallin. "The Cognitive Assessment Battery (CAB): a rapid test of cognitive domains." International Psychogeriatrics 23, no. 7 (January 21, 2011): 1144–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1041610210002334.

Full text
Abstract:
ABSTRACTBackground: The study aimed to evaluate the Cognitive Assessment Battery (CAB) in a specialist clinic setting in order to find out if it if it could be a supplement to the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) and distinguish between normal aging, mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia, as well as MCI of different severities.Methods: CAB consists of six short tests covering the cognitive domains of speed/attention, episodic memory, visuospatial functions, language and executive functions. It takes about 20 minutes to carry out and provides a quick overview of the patient's cognitive profile. Three groups were compared: healthy controls (N = 41), MCI (N = 83) and mild dementia (N = 28).Results: CAB distinguished very clearly between controls and MCI as well as MCI and dementia. On further analysis CAB also distinguished between MCI of different severities. It also showed to have good sensitivity and specificity for identifying more severe MCI.Conclusions: CAB seems to be a useful supplement to MMSE and a screening instrument for MCI and dementia with good sensitivity and specificity.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Rojo-Mota, Gloria, Eduardo J. Pedrero-Pérez, José M. Ruiz-Sánchez de León, Irene León-Frade, Patricia Aldea-Poyo, Marina Alonso-Rodríguez, Jara Pedrero-Aguilar, and Sara Morales-Alonso. "Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment to Evaluate People with Addictions." Occupational Therapy International 2017 (2017): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/2750328.

Full text
Abstract:
Background. The LOTCA (Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment) battery is a cognitive screening test which is widely used in occupational health. However, no work has been found that explores its use in addiction treatment.Objectives of Study. To explore the convergent validity of LOTCA with neuropsychological tests that assess related cerebral functional areas.Methods. The LOTCA, along with a battery of neuropsychological tests, was administered to a sample of 48 subjects who start a treatment by substance or gambling addictions.Findings. A correlational pattern was observed of a considerable magnitude between the effects of the LOTCA scales and those of some neuropsychological tests, but not with others. There is barely any convergence in measures with memory and executive function tests.Relevance to Clinical Practice. There is a lack of research applying test of occupational assessment to populations of patients treated by addictive behaviors. The LOTCA seems to be a reliable and valid test for preliminary screening of function in certain cognitive areas, easy, and quick to use (around 30 minutes). However, it must be supplemented with other tests for a full and ecological assessment of patients.Limitations. An incident, small-size sample.Recommendations for Further Research. New studies are needed to explore the applicability, diagnostic validity, and whole psychometric quality of the test in addiction-related treatment.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Ahn, Suk-Won, Su-Hyun Kim, Jee-Eun Kim, Sung-Min Kim, Seung Hyun Kim, Jung-Joon Sung, Kwang-Woo Lee, and Yoon-Ho Hong. "Frontal Assessment Battery to Evaluate Frontal Lobe Dysfunction in ALS Patients." Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques 38, no. 2 (March 2011): 242–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0317167100011409.

Full text
Abstract:
Background:Assessment of frontal lobe impairment in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a matter of great importance, since it often causes ALS patients to decrease medication and nursing compliance, thus shortening their survival time.Methods:The frontal assessment battery (FAB) is a short and rapid method for assessing frontal executive functions. We investigated the applicability of the FAB as a screening method for assessing cognitive impairments in 61 ALS patients. Depending on the results of the FAB, we classified patients into two subgroups: FAB-normal and FAB-abnormal. We then performed additional evaluations of cognitive function using the Korean version of the mini-mental state examination (K-MMSE), a verbal fluency test (COWAT), and a neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI). Results of these tests were compared between the two groups using Mann-Whitney U-tests, and Spearman correlation analyses were used to investigate the relationships between FAB score and disease duration and severity.Results:Of the 61 sporadic ALS patients included in this study, 14 were classified as FAB-abnormal and 47 were classified as FAB-normal. The FAB-normal and FAB-abnormal patients performed significantly differently in all domains of the COWAT. There was no difference in behavioral disturbance, as assessed by the NPI, between the two groups. The FAB scores were found to significantly correlate with both disease duration and severity.Conclusions:The FAB shows promise as a method of screening for frontal lobe dysfunction in ALS, as it is not only quick and easy, but also reliable. Additional studies should examine how FAB performance changes as ALS progresses.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Johnson, Nathan F., Chloe Hutchinson, Kaitlyn Hargett, Kyle Kosik, and Phillip Gribble. "Bend Don’t Break: Stretching Improves Scores on a Battery of Fall Assessment Tools in Older Adults." Journal of Sport Rehabilitation 30, no. 1 (January 1, 2021): 78–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2019-0246.

Full text
Abstract:
Context: Falls and loss of autonomy are often attributed in large part to musculoskeletal impairments in later adulthood. Age-related declines in flexibility contribute to late adulthood musculoskeletal impairment. The novel sitting-rising test has been proposed to be a quick, effective screening of musculoskeletal fitness, fall risk, and all-cause mortality in older adults. The timed up and go and 5 times sit-to-stand tests are two of the 3 most evidence-supported performance measures to assess fall risk. Objective: This study aimed to determine if 5 weeks of flexibility training could increase sitting-rising test, timed up and go, and 5 times sit-to-stand scores in community-dwelling older adults. Participants: Forty-seven adults aged 60 years and older (mean age = 66.7 y, SD = 4.1) participated in this study. Participants completed a static stretching protocol consisting of 3 weekly 1-hour stretching sessions. Results: The protocol improved flexibility as seen in sit-and-reach scores and improved scores on all outcome variables. Specifically, there was a significant increase in sitting-rising test scores from preintervention (M = 7.45, SD = 1.45) to postintervention (M = 8.04, SD = 1.36), t(42) = −5.21, P < .001. Timed up and go scores demonstrated a significant decrease from preintervention (M = 8.85, SD = 1.32) to postintervention (M = 8.20, SD = 1.35), t(46) = 5.10, P < .001. Five times sit-to-stand scores demonstrated a significant decrease from preintervention (M = 12.57, SD = 2.68) to postintervention (M = 10.46, SD = 2.06), t(46) = 6.62, P < .001. Finally, significant increases in sit-and-reach scores were associated with improved functional performance (r = −.308, P = .03). Conclusion: Findings suggest that flexibility training can be an effective mode of low-level exercise to improve functional outcomes. Static stretching may help to improve musculoskeletal health, promote autonomy, and decrease mortality in community-dwelling older adults.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Qassem, Tarik, Mohamed S. Khater, Tamer Emara, Doha Rasheedy, Heba M. Tawfik, Ahmed S. Mohammedin, Mohammad F. Tolba, Dina Aly El-Gabry, Karim Abdel Aziz, and Heba G. Saber. "Validation of the Mini-Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination in Mild Cognitive Impairment in Arabic Speakers." Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders 50, no. 2 (2021): 178–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000517580.

Full text
Abstract:
<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents a target for early detection and intervention in dementia, yet there is a shortage of validated screening tools in Arabic to diagnose MCI. The mini-Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (m-ACE) is a brief cognitive battery that is scored out of 30 and can be administered in under 5 min providing a quick screening tool for assessment of cognition. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> We aimed to validate the m-ACE in Arabic speakers in Egypt with MCI to provide cut-off scores. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We included 24 patients with MCI and 52 controls and administered the Arabic version of the m-ACE. <b><i>Results:</i></b> There was a statistically significant difference (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.0001) on the total m-ACE score between MCI patients (mean 18.54, SD 3.05) and controls (mean 24.54, SD 2.68). There was also a statistically significant difference between MCI patients and controls on the total score and the fluency, visuospatial, and memory recall sub-scores of the m-ACE (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.05). Performance on the m-ACE significantly correlated with both the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-III (ACE-III). Using a receiver operator characteristic curve, the optimal cut-off score for MCI on the m-ACE total score was 21 out of 30 (87.5% sensitivity, 84.6% specificity, and 85.5% accuracy). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We validated the Arabic m-ACE in Egyptian patients with MCI and provided objective validation of it as a screening tool for MCI, with good sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy that is comparable to other translated versions of the m-ACE in MCI.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Qassem, Tarik, Mohamed S. Khater, Tamer Emara, Doha Rasheedy, Heba M. Tawfik, Ahmed S. Mohammedin, Mohammad F. Tolba, Heba G. Saber, Dina Aly El-Gabry, and Karim Abdel Aziz. "Adaptation and Validation of the Mini-Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination in Dementia in Arabic Speakers in Egypt." Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders 49, no. 6 (2020): 611–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000513411.

Full text
Abstract:
<b><i>Background:</i></b> The mini-Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (m-ACE) is a brief cognitive battery that assesses 5 subdomains of cognition (attention, memory, verbal fluency, visuospatial abilities, and memory recall). It is scored out of 30 and can be administered in under 5 min providing a quick screening tool for assessment of cognition. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> We aimed to adapt the m-ACE in Arabic speakers in Egypt and to validate it in dementia patients to provide cutoff scores. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We included 37 patients with dementia (Alzheimer’s disease [<i>n</i> = 25], vascular dementia [<i>n</i> = 8], and dementia with Lewy body [<i>n</i> = 4]) and 43 controls. <b><i>Results:</i></b> There was a statistically significant difference (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) on the total m-ACE score between dementia patients (mean 10.54 and standard deviation [SD] 5.83) and controls (mean 24.02 and SD 2.75). There was also a statistically significant difference between dementia patients and controls on all sub-score domains of the m-ACE (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.05). Performance on the m-ACE significantly correlated with both the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-III (ACE-III). Using a receiver operator characteristic curve, the optimal cutoff score for dementia on the m-ACE total score was found to be 18 (92% sensitivity, 95% specificity, and 94% accuracy). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> We adapted the m-ACE in Arabic speakers in Egypt and provided objective validation of it as a screening tool for dementia, with high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Quick Screening Battery"

1

Hamer, Anne, and n/a. "The Stanford-Binet Scales : a comparison of Form L/M and the Fourth Edition." University of Canberra. Education, 1990. http://erl.canberra.edu.au./public/adt-AUC20060714.122557.

Full text
Abstract:
The Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition represents a new dimension in intelligence testing from the traditional Binet Scales. Based on a 3 level hierarchical model this represents a significant departure from the age scale format of previous revisions. Several abbreviated batteries are suggested. This study uses the "Quick Screening Battery" consisting of four subtests (Vocabulary, Quantitative, Pattern Analysis, and Bead Memory). Results are presented as Standard Age scores (SAS) for fifteen subtests in four Areas (Verbal Reasoning, Quantitative Reasoning, Abstract/Visual Reasoning and Short-term Memory), and the global 'g' Test Composite score. Thirty kindergarten children randomly assigned to two groups took both the Stanford-Binet: Fourth Edition and the Stanford-Binet: Form L/M in a counter balanced design. Nine hypotheses and one question are discussed. Statistical calculations for data analysis were arrived at through SPSSX/PC V2.0 (Noursis 1988). Correlations between Form L/M IQ and the Test Composite (r = .72), Verbal Reasoning (r = .71) and Abstract/Visual Reasoning (r = .41) reached significance at 0.05 or better. Other correlations showed similar trends as that found in the literature. The study gives promise for the "Quick Screening Battery" as a tool for screening young children.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the extended bibliographies on the topic 'Quick Screening Battery' for particular source types:
Journal articles
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography